I think this story will really raise your eyebrows;
Building permits filed with the city called it “a remodel with a new addition.†But neighbors Thomas and Holly Ruether contend it actually was a tear-down and the building of a new, larger home.
Paint it yellow and it is all good.
One must ask why is there planning, zoning, and permits? They make so many mistakes, the general population via associations is a better answer. What many don’t realize is the city can’t take you to court. Ordinances are unconstitutional. What they do instead is recruit your neighbors to harass you and alienate the whole neighborhood. Cameraman Bruce knows how this works.
This is typical of the California approach to a “remodel”, So long as 25% of the walls remain standing of the existing home, whatever else might happen is considered a “remodel”. Of course, the motivation for the CA scenario is the fact that so long as it is a “remodel” of a home more than 35-40 years old (when Reagan was Gov.), the property valuation->taxes cannot be increased.
Do they plan to create a beach in front of this house?
Late on the draw here, but if any of you want a better, more informed take on this story, CityPages – our free weekly tabloid – covered this in greater detail.
http://www.citypages.com/news/stearns-county-lakefront-mcmansion-ordered-torn-down-after-neighbor-fight/446461933
Particularly worth noting, the general contractor was the grandson of the homeowner, and the mayor who cast the deciding vote on the after-the-fact setback variance was the homeowner’s nephew.
This is like small town governance at its worst.